There are a lot of people that had good jobs in 2000, but who are now not doing so well - maybe not subsistence but going in that direction.

Politicially, the Nadir in recent times was when Goldwater got beat for president. Then the right wingers got together and came up with a strategy that got them progressively more power until now.

Maybe things are turning around now with Obama being elected. But if you look at the House now, they are as as right wing as ever, I think even worse than when Gnewt was Speaker. The Democrats did get Obamacare passed which they have been trying to do since the 1930s, but otherwise there have been no liberal programs.

The left wingers had unprecedented control of the US government when FDR was president and when LBJ was pushing through all his programs.

I think you're right, saving 20% of what you earn doesn't work for everyone.

Some people are in a position where it's not possible to work three jobs or get re-trained. Government safety net is a good thing in some situations.

But, I worked as engineer and a lot of my co-workers had all the latest gadgets, spent all their income or more, and they'll be working until they drop dead. And that's okay, a lot of people refuse to "retire" because they enjoy working. I liked working for the most part. I like not working even better : )

I get that Jerry. I also know plenty of people that live well, and well beyond their means, then whine all the time. It is frustrating and you just want to take out pen and paper and do some math for them. Those, and even those with modest incomes that spend too much and borrow, are not the people I am talking about that cannot save.

I'm not a political scientist, economist, or any other kind of social scientist. I am merely a photographer. So, I'm open to being wrong the musings I put forth below.

I think we can all agree that the purpose of ideologies is noble: They aim at guiding governing policy so that the largest number of people will benefit. Their aim, I should hope, is to increase social well being.

Sadly, ideologues get so caught up in their ideas that they forget to check them against reality. For example, the fanatic-right tends to idealize free markets so much they leave greed unchecked. Conversely, the fanatic-left tends to idealize regulation so much it creates micro-managing bureaucracies.

Science looks at commonly observable facts and creates theories about how these observations occur and interact. Pseudo-science creates a theory and tortures observations to fit the theory. Until now we haven't had extensive data on happiness, well being, health and prosperity. So all ideologies are, to varying degrees, pseudo-scineces. They have not had extensive, global, hard data to to support or deny their positions.

This is why I find the UN's World Happiness Report so fascinating. It is a serious attempt to understand happiness and well- being on a global scale. It provides quantifiable data that can be used to improve human well-being around the world.

I've only been able to skim through it but there are a couple of things that stand out, at least in its' opening arguments. First is that subjective happiness has objective, positive repercussions on society at large. Second, that it would appear that access to health care is an important factor contributing to well-being (duh!), but the means of access is not. For example Denmark (this reports' #1) uses a mandate model and Costa Rica (last reports' #1) uses a state run health system parallel to a private market.

It would seem to me that when ideologies become idiotologies we all loose. When we loose sight of the goal of general well-being because we want our favorite pseudo-science to win then we lose again. Furthermore, we lose when our ego's prevent us from seeing reality and our reality becomes idiotological vapor.

Exactly. Good oratory is often a precursor for really bad political results and widespread suffering. Marx, Lenin, Hitler, Mao, and unmentioned others were (or are) all awesome socialist orators. But socialism is without doubt the most deadly form of modern government. The vast majority of genocides from the past century were perpetrated by socialist rulers: Mao, Stalin, Hitler, Pot, Sung, Mariam. That short list totals 100 million dead. No non-socialist leaders even come close.

Your history of disparity is far too short; humans have almost always lived under a system where the many labored for the few, from the Pharaohs on down through thousands of years of history. The masses (to which I belong) have gotten much, much more of the pie in the last 100 years, compared to previous history. The real danger is letting the power revert back to the political class, which is happening even now. Our government is getting more powerful, more controlling, more intertwined with business, and the legislators are getting richer and more untouchable. Give the power back to the citizens.

Wrong on conservative history, also. Goldwater was the beginning of a resurgence. The right was at another "super" low (as now) under FDR. The American Right has a history of caving under strong socialist rulers.

> Maybe things are turning around now with Obama being elected.

Amazing. You act like this happened last week, when we have five years of evidence. And you ignore the fact that under the current president, the disparity you bemoan has gotten markedly worse, not better. No, it is not turning around. Equality didn't occur (as planned) in the USSR either. You had a wildly unequal ruler/ruled division. Socialism preaches equality but in reality, does the opposite: it sets up powerful tyrants.

I knew you'd go personal, and to someone who is to the left of Mao, I'm certain everyone else looks conservative. But you are wrong once again. Centrist independent here. The difference between you and me is, I happen to have a degree in history, and know what happened in the past.

Again, my offer stands: You shut up about your political perspective, and I won't teach history. These discussions don't belong here, but neither should your erroneous assertions go unanswered. Let's end it, and get back to the thread.

"Keep yourself fitHave your family eat healthyHave a good medical planHave enough savings/investments aside to see you through at least 6 monthsIf you can't find a job after 6 months, retrain, move location or have have a attitude adjustment as they're the only 3 reasons i can see sustaining long term unemployment.A good mate of mine had to quit his job to take care of his Mrs, he retrained and 1 year on is earning more money than he did before and is working from home."

Might you sketch us out a rough plan for accomplishing this? If so, you could well be a legitimate candidate to be our next Secretary of Labor. Assuming the D's don't screw things up even worse and hand the White House to the R's.

"Using yourself as an example still won't cut it as far as addressing people that live in real poverty.I could use myself too and make an even better point for you, as I make little, work an insane number of hours ( my 40 hour job, 10 or so hours a week for my landlord and another 25 or so sewing and knitting. Plus I cook our meals, clean etc) and so rarely eat out that it seems silly. I don't owe money, don't live beyond my means, eat healthy home cooked meals etc. I could be the poster child ( ...) for what you are saying and I used to say the same here on BPL. Now I think there are just too many variables and we are privileged bunch and to go around saying that "everyone" is able to save, is borderline insulting."

Kat,

In the context of this thread we are talking about people that make "preparations" for certain disasters.

If a person has no time or money to put into "preps" then there is not much of a point in discussing different ways or prepping is there.

It would be like me opening up a topic on a car forum asking if i should buy a koenigsegg or a Bugati Veyron, i don't have the finances to buy either

My suggestion is that instead of folks stock piling MRE's, ammunition, guns, toilet paper etc it would be better to save that money (money they would have spent on preps) and have some financial security behind them, as i feel it's far more likely these days for families to suffer financially rather than solar flares.

The other point i was trying to make is that, there are very few people on this planet that haven't gone through tough times, be it financially, health wise or emotionally, yet to my knowledge no one has yet died as a direct result of a solar flare.So i'm of the opinion that it's better to deal with the real problems we are facing today rather than some made up possible scenario.

In your case, when i was in a similar situation i trained and moved careers as i could see light at the end of the tunnel in the path i was taking.I managed to claw my way up the ladder in this new career and after a few years was able to earn enough and pair down my expenses enough to save a little.

I would argue that by retraining this was more valuable as a "prep" than any amount of stock piled items.

Might you sketch us out a rough plan for accomplishing this? If so, you could well be a legitimate candidate to be our next Secretary of Labor. Assuming the D's don't screw things up even worse and hand the White House to the R's."

Personally i take responsibility for my own actions and find that blaming others for my misfortunes is a waste of time and effort.If i am not earning enough to provide for my family i will do something about it, i certainly won't wait around for some "financial climate" or whatever nonsense they spout these days to make things sound better.Be that changing jobs, moving areas or even moving country, it really doesn't matter ALL that matters is that i can take care of my family, AGAIN i see that as MY responsibility not a government.That's my choice and has absolutely NOTHING to do with any sort of politics.

"In your case, when i was in a similar situation i trained and moved careers as i could see light at the end of the tunnel in the path i was taking.I managed to claw my way up the ladder in this new career and after a few years was able to earn enough and pair down my expenses enough to save a little."

In my case? You were in a similar situation? See the light at the end of the tunnel? What does that mean? Are you talking about me? Because there is no tunnel here. Sorry to hear about yours though. I don't remember complaining nor asking for any help. Your post is downright insulting now.

I've seen too much Sci-Fi channel to want to be the guy that says "Don't be ridiculous, there's no such thing as vampire flying squirrels" because he always gets it first. So while I agree that some folks may take the prepping thing too far, not prepping at all seems a little unrealistic too.

We have evolved into a just-in-time food delivery system. My grocery store is now stocked daily by trucks coming from distribution centers 500 miles away in Salt Lake City. I have grown fond of eating and the potential for disruption concerns me. How people live in big cities and not be the least bit paranoid is beyond me.

Toss in some boxes of mashed potatoes, oatmeal and canned meats and vegetable. So for a hundred and fifty bucks you could hold out fine for a month or so pretty easy. Most of the stuff keeps fine for years. Please don't be that guy.

Umm, *everyone* (who is anyone) knows that vampire flying squirrels are real, and a real threat. (rolls eyes at the inanity of humanity)

More seriously, best also be packing some good multi vitamin/mineral complexes or the like, because most the above food (minus canned veggies) is pretty lacking in nutrition. Becoming malnourished won't help ones long term chance of survival much.

Changing it up a little helps, like for example brown rice and lentils vs white rice and pinto beans. More expensive though.

I have decided that my BOB will include basic woodcraft tools for building fires and shelters. I have a saw capable of cutting fire and shelter-size branches/logs, and need to choose a chopping/splitting tool to complement it.

I have been looking around on line, and have narrowed my choices to a hatchet or a machete. They both weigh about 18 oz, and they both cost about $30. The hatchet has an 15" handle and 3.5" blade face, the machete is 28" long with a 22" blade.

So, considering comparable weights and prices, and multiple use options including possible self defense, I've been leaning towards the machete vs. the hatchet.

No slight was intended. Frankly, I don't spend much time considering exotic reasons to prep due to the abundance of more pedestrian ones. For example, those of us that are shooters got to witness the panic buying, hoarding and profiteering of ammo that took place earlier this year. Were people shooting more? Nope.

Just everybody had to buy every bit of ammo off the shelf whether they needed it or not. Kind of like the Tickle Me Elmo deal. People would show up at the store at opening to buy it all. Then they would sell it online for twice what they paid for it or more. You could buy ammo but you had to pay scalper prices. So now six months latter .22 ammo is starting to make it back onto store shelves.

Now I can do fine without .22 ammo for six months, but it would be different if it came to food.

PS, yes I need to toss some vitamins in the preps. Also needs more fat sources, maybe shelf stable margarine?

I've used both and have hacked down small trees to clear fields of fire for a machine gun with just a machete in Panama. My machete has been retired to the garage but I've seen them break. I doubt that it'd be as good as a hatchet over the long haul so I'd probably go with the hatchet over the machete for use in North America.

You've both touched on what we're doing for our house. We're still in the planning stages but are making our first run to Costco tomorrow. The plan is to buy high calorie foods in bulk and also to purchase a few bottles of multivitamins to make sure we're getting the micronutrients we need.

One of my concerns is making sure we have all of our amino acids covered. I've thought about caning some beef and chicken but it seems that I could buy something from GNC to cover this? The upside to this is that if we have to evacuate for some reason, it'd be easier to transport dry goods than mason jars full of meat. Logic check?